Thursday, December 29, 2011

On Ron Paul

If you read this blog or my original Something Happening Here site, you know that I have usually supported Ron Paul for president based on his support for the Constitution and denunciation of US Imperialism. The other thing is that everyone else running for the Republican Party nomination is a neocon. I cannot and will not support a neocon. Neocons are Trotskyites in conservative clothing, or they are Israel-firsters, or they are Dominionists.

Ron Paul appears to favor liberty. Well, good. But "favoring liberty" can be a double edged sword: liberty also means the liberty of business owners to exploit their workers; it also means liberty to let everyone fend for themselves...sure, many could do this but not the very young or the very old. Randians like Andrew Wilkow think liberty means the liberty of the poor to die off and just go away. Could it be that Ron Paul also favors this Social Darwinism? Maybe.

There is the issue of "racist newsletters." Very possibly, Ron Paul was once a racist. Clearly, if he allowed someone to write racist stuff in his newsletters many years ago, it could mean he once was a racist (so what? he repented, right? After all, I once hated the rich, regardless of how they made their me, all of the rich were exploiters and greedy psychopaths who deserved to die, but I no longer believe that...). More likely, since he is a libertarian who believes in Freedom of Speech, Paul allowed racists to write stuff into his newsletters and since he is for free speech, he has never apologized for letting racists write stuff into the newsletters. I do know for a fact that many white supremists, white separatists and neo-nazis DO support Ron Paul and have been doing so since the 90s.

But that is not why right wing talk radio and FOX News and the rest of the lamestream media hate Mr. Paul. The "he's a racist" BS is just a smokescreen.

Here is why they hate Ron Paul...

1. He is "outside the mainstream." Guys like Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Levin, and the rest of what Mike Church calls the "decepticons" MUST, and I mean MUST, stand with the mainstream, and by that I mean their corporate owners and sponsors. A stand-in for Andrew Wilkow today, December 29, 2011, named Tom Rose--who worked at the Jerusalem Post, which tells you where his main allegiance lies--laid it out in decent-sounding terms without all the Levin-inspired hate for the Republican from Texas: Rose, who went to Columbia Journalism School, told a listener that in the media it is all about "groupthink." The man is absolutely right. THAT is why right-wing talk show hosts (with the exception of Mike Church, the exception that proves the rule) not only hate Ron Paul, but hate him for the same reasons, day by day. This is despite the fact that they cannot really justify, even to themselves, going with Romney or Gingrich. That is why they generally mention Santorum or Bachmann as alternatives when listeners question Gingrich or Romney. (Funny--they don't mention Huntsman, who seems to be fairly decent a choice despite his BS on "taking out Iran."). In other words: Paul cannot win because if he does, then how can they justify their existence? So, though they might agree with Paul on some things, they cannot and must not support him...the neocons being who they are, if they aren't going to support Paul, then they have to issue the most ridiculous ad hominem attacks on him. Levin's utter hatred of Paul on his radio show is just one of the most insane examples.

2. Ron Paul puts America first, not Israel. In the world of the present-day Republican Party which is run by the neocons, this is a no-no. I really don't care about all the platitudes guys like Glen Beck or Rusty Humphries or any of the others have for "our troops." The fact is, Beck and the rest are on the radio or TV to ensure the superiority of Israel and to hell with the USA. I honestly believe that. Beck and the rest do not give a crap if the US goes bankrupt as long as Israel keeps getting taxpayer funds so that they can get American weapon technology and then turn around and sell it to China, or just give it to China. Has anyone reading this actually heard Beck or Hannity or Levin or anyone else even bring this up? Of course not, because Israel selling US weapons or technology to China is just fine with them. Yesterday Sean Hannity on America Right (aka SiriusXM Patriot) had some woman stand in for him, and she was dissing Obama because NYC or DC is not going to have a parade for returning Iraq War vets. Well, Boo-Hoo! Did returning Vietnam War vets get parades? I don't think so! It was former Trotskyite-turned-neocons like this woman, and Hannity and the rest, who probably applauded those who threw tomatoes and lemons and stuff at returning Vietnam War vets, or insulted our vets at airports, themselves. So, why should Obama or anyone give folks who couldn't even win a war against a fourth-rate power a parade? Parades are given when you WIN wars, idiot! But the reality is--and I really think this is the truth, until I have proof otherwise--that these neocon radio and TV hosts HATE THE UNITED STATES under the guise of loving Israel! If they are not Mossad agents or Sayanim otherwise, they sure sound and act like it. But because Ron Paul thinks Israel can take care of itself and does not need additional billions of US taxpayer funding, Ron Paul is anti-Israel, "anti-Semitic" and worthy of their hatred.

3. Ron Paul is NOT an entertainer. Entertainers, like Romney or Gingrich or Bachmann or Perry or Santorum, who either constantly flip-flop or say stupid things just to convince folks they really are "just like" the average American (after all, the average American can't find Iraq on a map, so it is perfectly fine to call Africa a country, or say they can see Russia from their house). Entertainers like Gingrich can divorce his first wife on her deathbed, then divorce his second wife because she's not good looking enough for "a future president," and get away with it because as we all know this is the way politicians are, but some second-rate stand-in for Levin, Mark Simon, can refuse to forgive Ron Paul for "doing racist newsletters for ten years" twenty-odd years ago, showing as much utter hatred for Paul as Levin has! So that because Paul has been fairly consistent in his positions for over 40 years and has never flip-flopped, has never said stupid things to appear "folksy", and has never CONFORMED to their group-think, he cannot be forgiven for allowing racists to write in his newsletters, he cannot be forgiven for not putting Israel ahead of the United States, and he just cannot be forgiven for anything--because of Ron Paul becomes our next president, their lying lives are over and they have to join the rest of us and get REAL JOBS!

Finally, though I defend Ron Paul I probably will not vote for him.

1. It is entirely possible that he still is (if he ever was) a racist, and, further, accusations that he is a Dominionist and that he will cause the old, the poor, and the sick to fend for themselves--he is somewhat of a Randian, after all (or else he would not have named his son Rand, right?)--just might be right on the mark. Meaning, Ron Paul will end "entitlements" such as Social Security and Medicare and (despite millions of us baby boomers who have put into these funds all of our lives) and not give us who have put in our money back. We all know Paul wants to end Social Security and Medicare--but what does he replace them with? Does the money we have put in our entire lives just POOF! Disappear?

2. It is entirely possible that Ron Paul is the greatest controlled opposition operative in American history. That is, Ron Paul just might be the most clandestine agent of the Rothschilds that could ever be created. It might hard to believe that someone so damned consistently Constitutional over the years could be a deep-cover Rothschild agent, but more and more bloggers are seeing him that way. What if they are correct?

3. Forget the "what-ifs" above, and here is a real "what-if": what if Ron Paul gets the Republican nomination despite every and all efforts to keep that from happening by the Republican insiders (already in Iowa there are plans to "count the ballots in a double-secret location"), and then what if Ron Paul becomes President?

A. Ron Paul gets assassinated right after the Electoral College confirms his presidency, or right after he takes over and starts on his Constitution-Restoration project. If Paul truly is "a man of the people" there is almost no doubt in my mind that he will be taken out...the power elites cannot afford to let him do what he says he will do. Paul at this point seems twice or thrice the leader JFK was before they took him out!

B. Ron Paul does confirm that he was a deep-cover controlled opposition person after all and he does what one would expect Romney or Gingrich or Obama to do--invade iran or completely sell the country into slavery to the bankers with no recourse.

C. Ron Paul must do what he would never before think of doing--issue one Executive Order after another to restore the rule of law, the US Constitution, because without Executive Orders, he can accomplish nothing through a Congress that has long ago sold out the American people to the bankers, the oligarchs, and Israel, and a Supreme Court that has long ago abandoned the Rule of Law, and nailed that coffin shut when they voted to make corporations "persons" under color of the 14th amendment. That is, Ron Paul WILL BE UNABLE TO DO ANYTHING TO RESTORE LIBERTY IN THE US unless he acts like a dictator! Further, he will have to arrest every last neocon and every last neolib to do anything that might even smack of being Constitutional. He will have to become what he hates.

And I cannot vote for him and watch him get assassinated, or co-opted, or turn into his own worst enemy.

Thus, we Americas will have to get what we deserve for it to get before things can change.

Because we love not the truth, we will continue to be under strong delusion, and thus we will vote for Romney or Gingrich, or Obama. We do not deserve a true statesman, which is what Ron Paul has shown himself to be.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

My "Next Post" in Praise Or Criticism of OWS and An Even Better Idea!

Praise Occupy Wall Street? Me? The Non-Progressive?

Here are a few things they have done right:

1. Some are occupying foreclosed houses on behalf of foreclosed families, or, rather, families foreclosed-upon by the banks who have no clear title to these foreclosed homes, cannot prove they "own" the homes using the tried and true Marcy Kaptur method of "showing the note" that proves they own it, and cannot prove they did not acquire the home fraudulently. Ipso facto, if the bank doesn't own it then the family does! Take that, Andrew "no protesting on private property without permission" Wilkow!

2. Shutting down the ports in Oakland, etc., may not sound like a great idea because that stops folks from getting perhaps needed goods (like, say, meds from India purchased through US pharmacy Progressive RX, where you can save up to 80 percent on your prescription meds!), but it is in fact a great idea, because this is an instance where ACTUAL WORKERS HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO ACTIVELY SUPPORT "the 99 percent", lending credence to the truth that it isn't just a bunch of "dirty hippies wanting something for nothing." Besides which, don't we have a huge inventory of worthless crap from China anyway?

3. Occupy DC is actually moving in the direction of protesting the government instead of just the oligarchs that own it. For one thing, protesting the oligarchs will NOT move the oligarchs to stop owning the government. But perhaps protesting the government in large enough numbers just might send some--and then a few more then a few more--in Congress and the bureaucracies to grow a pair...and a conscience...and do what they should have already done: jail the banksters and fraudsters, and re-establish the rule of law in the US.

4. Speaking of Occupy DC, when are they gonna "occupy" the Pentagon? Or do a better job of protesting, not the war in Iraq or Afghanistan, but the entire BS war on terrorism? Better yet, go after the REAL terrorists--the US government! Ah, but now let me continue the criticisms beyond just the notion that most OWS folks wrongly want to overthrow capitalism for socialism, and that many really do want something for nothing.

5. Now that the Senate and Congress have passed (and Obama WILL sign!) that Indefinite Detention, No-More-Habeas-Corpus, No-More-Trial, Obama-Can-Murder-Whomever-He-Wants-To FOR ALL US CITIZENS addition to the National Defense Authorization Act, I have a really good idea! Those of you whom have served in the military should maybe consider this: occupy military bases! As in this: HELL NO! WE WON'T GO ARRESTING OUR FELLOW AMERICANS JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE PROTESTING OR DISSENTING OR CRITICIZING THE PRESIDENT OR BECAUSE THEY ARE OUT AFTER "CURFEW" AND WILL NOT PARTAKE IN INSTITUTING A FASCIST TOTALITARIAN POLICE STATE FOR THE BENEFIT OF YOU ONE-TENTH-OF-ONE-PERCENTERS! And that goes for you whom have served as cops, National Guardsmen, Border Patrolmen, Sheriffs, Deputies, Constables, Meter Maids, Dog Catchers, Dumpster police, highway patrol or any other "duly delegated authorities"...and do NOT go throwing Romans 13 or any other "religious" rational for allowing the growing North-Korea-like conditions to exist in this once-free nation.

6. Instead of protesting, like I said in a previous post, I have a much, much, better idea: protest an unlawful, unjust, lawless, criminal and psychopathic and money-loving system by GETTING OUT OF THIS SYSTEM AS MUCH AS YOU CAN!

Thursday, December 1, 2011

If It's "Battlefield America" You Want...

Dear Inbred Idiots...Er, Power Elites

Now that you have had your puppet Senators pass the new indefinite detention bill without the amendment Rand Paul sponsored, so that now you can indefinitely imprison whomever you want including me, I suppose, because I am writing this on my blog, let me say this before you put me in Gitmo:

If it is "Battlefield America" you want, then it is "Battlefield America" that you will get.

And (despite the denial of the 50 to 70 percent who are either still asleep or just waking up) in your "War" against the 90 plus million of the American people with guns and more of us, let me say this:


I pray, however, to God Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth, that those who capture you traitors, along with your media syncophants and the criminals and psychopaths who own you, show more mercy toward you than you have shown toward us, and put you on trial for your crimes against God, the American people and the Constitution and Rule of Law, instead of handing you what you deserve, which is a hanging, being shot by a firing squad, or a guillotine.

For what you have done is set us up for civil war; I know why you passed this travesty (S 1867 and its partner "laws"); you are scared shitless of us and in your fear of the rule of law and justice you went even farther than Hitler or Stalin would have: pre-emptive totalitarianism, for you know that you are destroying this country economically and politically and socially, according to your master's bidding, and thus you know civil unrest is coming, so you have to pre-emptively squelch it. Next to come, of course, is the final straw of martial law and gun confiscation.

Most gun owners will not submit while a few pussies will because they are afraid of FEMA camps. In fact, most gun owners will "occupy" their guns and their land, and, further, many military persons and law enforcement officers will stand with We the People against you. And once that happens, you oligarchs, criminals and psychopaths are toast.

You thought we were all "sheep," but while some are and always will be, you attacked the wrong people, for unlike Russians with the Bolsheviks or Germans with the Nazis, whom had just barely begun to taste liberty, we Americans have had liberty too long and remember what it is, and oh yeah, we have 90 million gun owners and many times that guns and billions of bullets, while you will almost assuredly have to bring in foreign armies to stop us.

I would rather just live my life in peace, going about my business, being close to my Father God and His Son Christ.

It is YOU TRAITORS who are setting us up for a "battlefield."

So, if it is civil war you want, it is civil war you will get.

And may the Almighty God, the Lord Jesus Christ beside him, have mercy on your souls.

Final Argument Against Wilkow: There Is NOTHING In The Constitution About Only Protesting "With Permission" Regarding Property

Mr. Andrew Wilkow, you may think it a bit too strong of me calling you a "traitor" to the Constitution because of your argument that the Occupy movement has no "practical" right to protest while you skirt around the issue of something that sounds like "I never said OWS has no right to protest." (Well, you never said "I never said OWS has no right to protest" but for all practical purposes you DID say OWS has no right to protest because they are "violating public or private ordinances" and misusing Property.

This carries with it the same convoluted argument that Meygn Kelly used to describe pepper spray as a "vegetable" (just like President Reagen once said ketchup was to cut funding for school lunches and Head Start programs).

Well, Mr W, pepper spray IS technically a vegetable, just like technically if the Occupy protesters are using either public or private property they ought to keep this property in good working order as well as allow others to use it.

Now, you may have forgotten in your zeal to denounce OWS's Constitutionally-granted right to protest because it is "run by dirty hippies and other leftists," which I think you once admitted you couldn't Ayn Randian of you! Gee, Andrew, some folks think Jesus Christ looked like a dirty hippie! But must have forgotten at some point that the OWS protesters in Zucotti Park WERE GIVEN PERMISSION TO PROTEST THERE BY THE OWNERS OF ZUCOTTI PARK! Furthermore, the OWS protesters DID share the park, for one, with homeless New Yorkers, and did let folks walking their dogs use the park, etc.

Now, go back a couple of days to Tuesday, November 30, when you (during your interview with Matthew something-or-other of the Weekly Standard) stated that some Tea Party protest in Richmond (I think) was fined for using some property or other without some form of permission from the city authorities, but that the OWS movement has not been fined and how terrible is that! Well, Mr. Wilkow, right then and there you destroyed your own argument: if the Tea Party has to pay a fine then it must mean that they were "illegally" protesting, no? And, conversely, if the OWS movement doesn't have to pay a fine then it means they are LEGALLY protesting, maybe?

Of course, I could be wrong and it could be that the Tea Party was fined because the city could get money out of the leaders of the movement there, because everyone knows that since the Koch Brothers hijacked Ron Paul's movement with the help of Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, you--ah, but aren't you, Glenn, Sarah, and the Koch Brothers PART OF THE ONE PERCENT??? MAYBE THAT IS WHY YOU HATE OCCUPY WALL STREET, MR. WILKOW??? ISN'T IT TIME TO TELL THE TRUTH, MR. WILKOW???--well, everyone knows that since (insert a certain onerous word here) to the Constitution such as yourself, Glenn and the rest of you neoconservative media clowns have hijacked Ron Paul's movement simply to enrich yourself at the lair's table and wish "us little people" would just go away and die, that there is no way you would uphold the right to protest except when it is your Koch-supported-(insert onerous word here)-to-the-Constitution-movement that is protesting!

Gee, I bet you laughed along with your Wall Street pals when a Marine in the Oakland OWS protest got hit with a projectile by the Oakland police that not only sent him to the hospital but has disabled him really good, or when a former police chief from Philly got beat up really good, or some pregnent lady in Olympia lost her unborn child...did you, Mr. Wilkow, get together with Meygn, Bill O'Really, Rush, and the Koch's to party over it? "Take that, you worthless, unproductive, "something for nothing" 99 percent!"

BTW, who said everyone in the OWS movement was a "hippie," "unproductive," "something for nothing"? As untrue as that is (being about 100 airline pilots protested early on...gee don't airline pilots make almost as much fiat currency as you, Mr. Wilkow; being Marines, former and current peace officers, union and non-union laborers, public and private-sector employees, old folks, old well as "dirty hippies") the fact is that people of all walks of life are protesting because the so-called "one percent" has looted this country for its own greedy gain...ah, but Randians like you think greed is good...and also, BTW, how productive are you, Andrew, making six figures sitting a few hours a day in front of a radio/internet mike? What do you actually produce? Or are you as much a parasite as those you denounce? How many "jobs" do YOU provide?

Oh, by the way, Andrew, there is nothing...nothing! the Constitution about folks trying to redress grievances (ie. protesting) only when they have the property owner's "permission" to do so (and no, Andrew, there's nothing in the Constitution that says only right wing protesters have the right to protest regardless of property rights) in a manner that says "one can only redress grievances on property where it is permitted by the property owner." Andrew, it doesn't say that! Seriously! Read the Constitution some time and see if you can find anywhere that it says one can protest only where one is permitted to. And don't hand me that worn out argument that the Constitution only applies to the Federal government! I know that, Andrew! But, thanks to the Fourteeth Amendment, aren't we all UNITED STATES CITIZENS now? Ipso facto, the Constitution applies to us!

Finally, let me clue you in to how stupid your argument is. Let's say I am a member of the one percent..I'd have to be for this to happen...but I was sick and tired of my fellow one-percenters screwing and looting the 99 percent, so, since I owned one hundred thousand acres out in the middle of nowhere, I decided that I would let every single OWS person, regardless of where their OWS protest was, protest on my land, put up tents, toilets, etc. (think about what the farmer Yasgar did for the Woodstock crowd in 1969 up in Saugherties, NY). There would be no way cops or troops or whatever could come on my land and hurt the protesters. Fine. The thing is, what effect would it have to do this? The government and the one percent (you, for one) could just simply ignore the protesters and nothing would be of any effect. You know, if a tree falls in a forest but the mainstream media (again, you, for one) doesn't hear it, does it make a sound?

Note: But we are now beyond Gandhi's phase one: "First they ignore you". We are now in phase two: "Then they denounce you." Because OWS does NOT want to be ignored, they are not protesting on someone's private property out in the middle of nowhere where it would be okay by you to protest. Since they are protesting on the thick of things on either public streets or private parks, you are denouncing them. But still, it IS having some effect and might have a whole lot more (if they can keep themselves from being co-opted by the MoveOn, SEIU, or Michael Moore crowd of the left).

That is why, Andrew, the OWS protesters MUST protest on public property, on Wall Street, in front of the White House or the Capitol, in front of the Oakland or Philly or LA mayor's office or city council, or in front of the Dallas Federal Reserve Building. Because the Constitution you claim to so clearly uphold DOES NOT SAY THIS CANNOT HAPPEN BECAUSE OF PRIVATE OR PUBLIC PROPERTY ISSUES.